Read FICTION books online

Reading books fiction Have you ever thought about what fiction is? Probably, such a question may seem surprising: and so everything is clear. Every person throughout his life has to repeatedly create the works he needs for specific purposes - statements, autobiographies, dictations - using not gypsum or clay, not musical notes, not paints, but just a word. At the same time, almost every person will be very surprised if he is told that he thereby created a work of fiction, which is very different from visual art, music and sculpture making. However, everyone understands that a student's essay or dictation is fundamentally different from novels, short stories, news that are created by professional writers. In the works of professionals there is the most important difference - excogitation. But, oddly enough, in a school literature course, you donā€™t realize the full power of fiction. So using our website in your free time discover fiction for yourself.



Fiction genre suitable for people of all ages. Everyone will find something interesting for themselves. Our electronic library is always at your service. Reading online free books without registration. Nowadays ebooks are convenient and efficient. After all, donā€™t forget: literature exists and develops largely thanks to readers.
The genre of fiction is interesting to read not only by the process of cognition and the desire to empathize with the fate of the hero, this genre is interesting for the ability to rethink one's own life. Of course the reader may accept the author's point of view or disagree with them, but the reader should understand that the author has done a great job and deserves respect. Take a closer look at genre fiction in all its manifestations in our elibrary.



Read books online Ā» Fiction Ā» The Trial by Franz Kafka (best chinese ebook reader TXT) šŸ“–

Book online Ā«The Trial by Franz Kafka (best chinese ebook reader TXT) šŸ“–Ā». Author Franz Kafka



1 ... 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44
Go to page:
it could be of no more use.ā€ ā€œHe didnā€™t ask him before that,ā€ said the priest, ā€œand donā€™t forget he was only a doorkeeper, and as doorkeeper he did his duty.ā€

ā€œWhat makes you think he did his duty?ā€ asked K., ā€œHe didnā€™t. It might have been his duty to keep everyone else away, but this man is who the door was intended for and he ought to have let him in.ā€ ā€œYouā€™re not paying enough attention to what was written and youā€™re changing the story,ā€ said the priest. ā€œAccording to the story, there are two important things that the doorkeeper explains about access to the law, one at the beginning, one at the end. At one place he says he canā€™t allow him in now, and at the other he says this entrance was intended for him alone. If one of the statements contradicted the other you would be right and the doorkeeper would have cheated the man from the country. But there is no contradiction. On the contrary, the first statement even hints at the second. You could almost say the doorkeeper went beyond his duty in that he offered the man some prospect of being admitted in the future. Throughout the story, his duty seems to have been merely to turn the man away, and there are many commentators who are surprised that the doorkeeper offered this hint at all, as he seems to love exactitude and keeps strict guard over his position. He stays at his post for many years and doesnā€™t close the gate until the very end, heā€™s very conscious of the importance of his service, as he says, ā€˜Iā€™m powerful,ā€™ he has respect for his superiors, as he says, ā€˜Iā€™m only the lowliest of the doormenā€™, heā€™s not talkative, as through all these years the only questions he asks are ā€˜disinterestedā€™, heā€™s not corruptible, as when heā€™s offered a gift he says, ā€˜Iā€™ll only accept this so that you donā€™t think thereā€™s anything youā€™ve failed to do,ā€™ as far as fulfilling his duty goes he can be neither ruffled nor begged, as it says about the man that, ā€˜he tires the doorkeeper with his requestsā€™, even his external appearance suggests a pedantic character, the big hooked nose and the long, thin, black tartar-beard. How could any doorkeeper be more faithful to his duty? But in the doorkeeperā€™s character there are also other features which might be very useful for those who seek entry to the law, and when he hinted at some possibility in the future it always seemed to make it clear that he might even go beyond his duty. Thereā€™s no denying heā€™s a little simple minded, and that makes him a little conceited. Even if all he said about his power and the power of the other doorkeepers and how not even he could bear the sight of them - I say even if all these assertions are right, the way he makes them shows that heā€™s too simple and arrogant to understand properly. The commentators say about this that, ā€˜correct understanding of a matter and a misunderstanding of the same matter are not mutually exclusiveā€™. Whether theyā€™re right or not, you have to concede that his simplicity and arrogance, however little they show, do weaken his function of guarding the entrance, they are defects in the doorkeeperā€™s character. You also have to consider that the doorkeeper seems to be friendly by nature, he isnā€™t always just an official. He makes a joke right at the beginning, in that he invites the man to enter at the same time as maintaining the ban on his entering, and then he doesnā€™t send him away but gives him, as it says in the text, a stool to sit on and lets him stay by the side of the door. The patience with which he puts up with the manā€™s requests through all these years, the little questioning sessions, accepting the gifts, his politeness when he puts up with the man cursing his fate even though it was the doorkeeper who caused that fate - all these things seem to want to arouse our sympathy.

Not every doorkeeper would have behaved in the same way. And finally, he lets the man beckon him and he bends deep down to him so that he can put his last question. Thereā€™s no more than some slight impatience -

the doorkeeper knows everythingā€™s come to its end - shown in the words, ā€˜Youā€™re insatiableā€™. There are many commentators who go even further in explaining it in this way and think the words, ā€˜youā€™re insatiableā€™ are an expression of friendly admiration, albeit with some condescension.

However you look at it the figure of the doorkeeper comes out differently from how you might think.ā€ ā€œYou know the story better than I do and youā€™ve known it for longer,ā€ said K. They were silent for a while. And then K. said, ā€œSo you think the man was not cheated, do you?ā€ ā€œDonā€™t get me wrong,ā€ said the priest, ā€œIā€™m just pointing out the different opinions about it. You shouldnā€™t pay too much attention to peopleā€™s opinions. The text cannot be altered, and the various opinions are often no more than an expression of despair over it. Thereā€™s even one opinion which says itā€™s the doorkeeper whoā€™s been cheated.ā€ ā€œThat does seem to take things too far,ā€ said K. ā€œHow can they argue the doorkeeper has been cheated?ā€ ā€œTheir argument,ā€ answered the priest, ā€œis based on the simplicity of the doorkeeper. They say the doorkeeper doesnā€™t know the inside of the law, only the way into it where he just walks up and down. They see his ideas of whatā€™s inside the law as rather childish, and suppose heā€™s afraid himself of what he wants to make the man frightened of. Yes, heā€™s more afraid of it than the man, as the man wants nothing but to go inside the law, even after heā€™s heard about the terrible doormen there, in contrast to the doorkeeper who doesnā€™t want to go in, or at least we donā€™t hear anything about it. On the other hand, there are those who say he must have already been inside the law as he has been taken on into its service and that could only have been done inside. That can be countered by supposing he could have been given the job of doorkeeper by somebody calling out from inside, and that he canā€™t have gone very far inside as he couldnā€™t bear the sight of the third doorkeeper. Nor, through all those years, does the story say the doorkeeper told the man anything about the inside, other than his comment about the other doorkeepers. He could have been forbidden to do so, but he hasnā€™t said anything about that either. All this seems to show he doesnā€™t know anything about what the inside looks like or what it means, and that thatā€™s why heā€™s being deceived. But heā€™s also being deceived by the man from the country as heā€™s this manā€™s subordinate and doesnā€™t know it. Thereā€™s a lot to indicate that he treats the man as his subordinate, I expect you remember, but those who hold this view would say itā€™s very clear that he really is his subordinate. Above all, the free man is superior to the man who has to serve another. Now, the man really is free, he can go wherever he wants, the only thing forbidden to him is entry into the law and, whatā€™s more, thereā€™s only one man forbidding him to do so - the doorkeeper. If he takes the stool and sits down beside the door and stays there all his life he does this of his own free will, thereā€™s nothing in the story to say he was forced to do it. On the other hand, the doorkeeper is kept to his post by his employment, heā€™s not allowed to go away from it and it seems heā€™s not allowed to go inside either, not even if he wanted to.

Also, although heā€™s in the service of the law heā€™s only there for this one entrance, therefore heā€™s there only in the service of this one man who the doorā€™s intended for. This is another way in which heā€™s his subordinate. We can take it that heā€™s been performing this somewhat empty service for many years, through the whole of a manā€™s life, as it says that a man will come, that means someone old enough to be a man.

That means the doorkeeper will have to wait a long time before his function is fulfilled, he will have to wait for as long as the man liked, who came to the door of his own free will. Even the end of the doorkeeperā€™s service is determined by when the manā€™s life ends, so the doorkeeper remains his subordinate right to the end. And itā€™s pointed out repeatedly that the doorkeeper seems to know nothing of any of this, although this is not seen as anything remarkable, as those who hold this view see the doorkeeper as deluded in a way thatā€™s far worse, a way thatā€™s to do with his service. At the end, speaking about the entrance he says, ā€˜Now Iā€™ll go and close itā€™, although at the beginning of the story it says the door to the law is open as it always is, but if itā€™s always open - always - that means itā€™s open independently of the lifespan of the man itā€™s intended for, and not even the doorkeeper will be able to close it. There are various opinions about this, some say the doorkeeper was only answering a question or showing his devotion to duty or, just when the man was in his last moments, the doorkeeper wanted to cause him regret and sorrow. There are many who agree that he wouldnā€™t be able to close the door. They even believe, at the end at least, the doorkeeper is aware, deep down, that heā€™s the manā€™s subordinate, as the man sees the light that shines out of the entry to the law whereas the doorkeeper would probably have his back to it and says nothing at all to show thereā€™s been any change.ā€ ā€œThat is well substantiated,ā€ said K., who had been repeating some parts of the priestā€™s explanation to himself in a whisper. ā€œIt is well substantiated, and now I too think the doorkeeper must have been deceived. Although that does not mean Iā€™ve abandoned what I thought earlier as the two versions are, to some extent, not incompatible. Itā€™s not clear whether the doorkeeper sees clearly or is deceived. I said the man had been cheated. If the doorkeeper understands clearly, then there could be some doubt about it, but if the doorkeeper has been deceived then the man is bound to believe the same thing. That would mean the doorkeeper is not a cheat but so simple-minded that he ought to be dismissed from his job immediately; if the doorkeeper is mistaken it will do him no harm but the man will be harmed immensely.ā€ ā€œThere youā€™ve found another opinion,ā€ said the priest, ā€œas there are many who say the story doesnā€™t give anyone the right to judge the doorkeeper.

However he might seem to us he is still in the service of the law, so he belongs to the law, so heā€™s beyond what man has a right to judge. In this case we canā€™t believe the doorkeeper is the manā€™s subordinate.

Even if he has to stay at the entrance into the law his service makes him incomparably more than if he lived freely in the world. The man has come to the law for the first time and the doorkeeper is already there.

Heā€™s been given his position by the law, to doubt his worth would be to doubt the law.ā€ ā€œI canā€™t say Iā€™m in complete agreement with this view,ā€

said K.

1 ... 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44
Go to page:

Free ebook Ā«The Trial by Franz Kafka (best chinese ebook reader TXT) šŸ“–Ā» - read online now

Comments (0)

There are no comments yet. You can be the first!
Add a comment